No, you're obsession with Sakurai's perversion is worse than Issei's obsession with Boobs from High School DxD and that's pretty extreme. Japanese perversion is unprecedented but I've come to enjoy it just for the lulz.

No, you're obsession with Sakurai's perversion is worse than Issei's obsession with Boobs from High School DxD and that's pretty extreme. Japanese perversion is unprecedented but I've come to enjoy it just for the lulz.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Nobody is more obsessed with anything like he is. Except me and Smash Bros

@Dillo64 what exactly does Namco Bandai own in regards to Goku/Dragon Ball Z? The character itself isn't owned by Namco Bandai, is it? Also Goku, like you've said, would be a special case, essentially why most think he has a 0% chance since he contradicts some of the rules of character selection. Now if you have a problem with predicting characters using these such rules then that's another matter...
And villager, unlike Goku, was in the planning stages of character selection in Brawl, whilst Goku wasn't even considered. This happens for a lot of characters, such as Mewtwo and Bowser being considered for 64 but not making it, only to return in the next installment. The villager incident is nothing new or special, but it keeps getting brought up.

Click to expand...

I don't know/care what Namco owns in regards to DB, but that's beside the point here. It's the fact that they have owned enough and been trusted enough to make DB games in the past that gives them a reliable and stable connection to the real owners of DB, and with them, Namco, and Nintendo all being major Japanese entertainment companies, it's not illogical to think they could work out some kind of business deal that they could all profit from. Something like, I dunno, putting Goku in Smash Bros.

As for these.... lol... "RULES" of character selection, the number one thing that breaks these rules is money. Sonic was never considered for Brawl. He was a last-minute add because..... why again? Oh right. Money.

The fact that villager was in planning stages for Brawl and then cut and then brought back again shows the fickleness of the developers and how much things can change sporadically over time. Something may be out of the question now, but then suddenly its an option, then it's a go, then it's cut, then it's back on again. This is the nature of game development. Rules are broken constantly, new ideas are scrapped, old ideas are revisited. The rules change, the game changes.

Video games are not cakes. It is not something you have specific ingredients to, that you have to constantly follow specific step-by-step rules to make, where if you deviate from the rules everything falls on top of itself. They are dynamic, changing, and incredibly fickle creatures.

... of course though, without some established "rules", the none of your little character speculations in this thread would work, which I think is why you guys are clinging so hard to them. A lot of this thread is just trying to find logic where there is none, making up reasons and judgments that the developer have likely never even considered, and over-interpreting and over-analyzing the most miniscule and indeterminate of data that may or may not have anything to do with anything. I know this because I used to be just like all of you, and it's just making me lol so much.

But whatever. Have your fun, cling to your mostly made-up or outdated "rules" if that is what gives you the illusion of structure and stability in your harried speculations. Just don't expect me to follow them.

~TheDillo~

Click to expand...

I don't care if you dislike how speculation here uses rules and such, I'm not here to argue that. And I've even stressed that already. What I am trying to say is that within the confines of these rules, Goku has a 0% chance. That is why most here say that Goku will never happen. You're on an entirely different footing here, so it's useless for you to argue against this, you aren't convincing anyone since your ideals are polar opposite.
That was what I was trying to say.

I don't care if you dislike how speculation here uses rules and such, I'm not here to argue that. And I've even stressed that already. What I am trying to say is that within the confines of these rules, Goku has a 0% chance. That is why most here say that Goku will never happen. You're on an entirely different footing here, so it's useless for you to argue against this, you aren't convincing anyone since your ideals are polar opposite.
That was what I was trying to say.

Click to expand...

So basically, "everyone here is too delusional to accept fact and logic so don't bother"?

Fuck that noise, if everyone took that advice we'd still be in the Dark Ages. You guys do or say something stupid and I'm in the mood then I'm gonna call it out.

These aren't "my ideals", I'm stating facts. Its just how things ARE. You guys are literally denying reality.

I don't care if you dislike how speculation here uses rules and such, I'm not here to argue that. And I've even stressed that already. What I am trying to say is that within the confines of these rules, Goku has a 0% chance. That is why most here say that Goku will never happen. You're on an entirely different footing here, so it's useless for you to argue against this, you aren't convincing anyone since your ideals are polar opposite.
That was what I was trying to say.

Click to expand...

So basically, "everyone here is too delusional to accept fact and logic so don't bother"?

Fuck that noise, if everyone took that advice we'd still be in the Dark Ages. You guys do or say something stupid and I'm in the mood then I'm gonna call it out.

These aren't "my ideals", I'm stating facts. Its just how things ARE. You guys are literally denying reality.

~TheDillo~

Click to expand...

If that's how you view my advice then damn, there's no helping you.
And lol, "facts". Almost everything you stated is just speculation like the rest of us, Namco Bandai probably putting Goku in because of their ties with the character? Speculation, not fact. You know what is fact? That Sakurai stated that anime/manga characters are not welcome in Smash. Oh, you're saying that he may change his mind due to whatever reason? Speculation.
...
spec·u·la·tion (spky-lshn)n.1. a. Contemplation or consideration of a subject; meditation.b. A conclusion, opinion, or theory reached by conjecture.c. Reasoning based on inconclusive evidence; conjecture or supposition.
You know when people say they say that Goku has a 0% chance? That's speculation, not fact. Nothing "delusional" about it since I'm pretty sure no one views it as fact, get off your high horse, all you're basically doing is discouraging speculation. Because if we go, "oh yay everything can change" then there'd be blanket statements galore(spongebob for smash). And actually these rules DO have an impact or else people wouldn't use it to predict Rosalina, Megaman or some of the Brawl characters. It's been proven that what Sakurai says in interviews mostly DOES translate into the game, or else people would stop guessing, and predicting. There's nothing delusional about accepting those precedents when they're met with good results.

Director Masahiro Sakurai has always placed a great deal of importance on balancing games in the Super Smash Bros. series, and he won’t be making any exceptions for the upcoming Wii U and 3DS game. In this week’s issue of Famitsu, Sakurai talks about the importance of balance in his feature column.

“Now that Sunday’s day off is past, I’m currently working on the character adjustment for Super Smash Bros. for Nintendo 3DS and Wii U,” says Sakurai. “At the moment, Bowser is very strong. He’s really strong. Fans of Smash Bros. probably never saw him as too much of a strong character, but this time, his ability to knock others out is very strong!”

Interesting that Bowser will be a much more powerful character compared to how he was in previous games, which is awesome because let's be honest, Bowser while pretty fun to play, didn't stand a chance against a majority of the cast.

I think balancing Smash would be a nightmare. Fighters like SF are challenging enough to balance, and you fight inside rectangle basically.

I think updates and actually working with the competitive community (like other fighting developers do) would help smash a lot. You can't ask for better play testers than the competitive community, and they do it for free.

I think balancing Smash would be a nightmare. Fighters like SF are challenging enough to balance, and you fight inside rectangle basically.

I think updates and actually working with the competitive community (like other fighting developers do) would help smash a lot. You can't ask for better play testers than the competitive community, and they do it for free.

Click to expand...

If there's one developer who's good at balancing their games it's Namco/Bandai.

I think balancing Smash would be a nightmare. Fighters like SF are challenging enough to balance, and you fight inside rectangle basically.

I think updates and actually working with the competitive community (like other fighting developers do) would help smash a lot. You can't ask for better play testers than the competitive community, and they do it for free.

I think balancing Smash would be a nightmare. Fighters like SF are challenging enough to balance, and you fight inside rectangle basically.

I think updates and actually working with the competitive community (like other fighting developers do) would help smash a lot. You can't ask for better play testers than the competitive community, and they do it for free.

Click to expand...

If there's one developer who's good at balancing their games it's Namco/Bandai.

They got dis.

Click to expand...

actually unfortunately they don't.

Sakurai stated in another article awhile back he went back to balancing all characters himself again.

The next smash's balance is screwed again unless sakurai makes an actual effort to work with the competitive players on character balance, and we all know that's not about to happen anytime soon.

I still hope beyond hope that smash4 has both patches to fix any balance issues later on, and initially out the door, decent to good balance.

I like that Sakurai is focusing more on balancing. His balancing methodology... not so much.

“Rather than directly weakening an attack’s advantageous parts, we’re putting effort into keeping them strong, while adding other weaknesses to them,” Sakurai explains. “Like giving the attacks punishable openings, or weakening the character’s mobility or recovery rate. We’re making comprehensive adjustments to characters, even for parts that might seem completely irrelevant.”

This is like Sakurai's comment about Fox's recovery being balanced because it's 'easy to mess up'. If a character has crap recovery and mobility, they're inherently worse in a game like Smash that is focused on constant movement. Knockback is important, but if you keep an attack powerful with a lot of lag or with a small hitbox, people aren't going to use it because they run the risk of getting hit. This is basically the exact problem that Bowser and Ganondorf had in Brawl; taking a "high risk/high-reward" approach with ALL of a character's attacks probably means that they'll end up in the low tier.

"Sakurai also talks about the difficulty in adjusting balances for things such as four player free-for-alls and 1-on-1 fights, as their circumstances are completely different. This can’t be helped at times, he says. For example, some attacks such as Captain Falcon’s “Falcon Punch” might work well when there’s more players, but might not ever hit during a 1-on-1 fight."

It's good that he's taking 4-player into consideration too, but it shouldn't be on equal ground with single-player in terms of balancing priority since it's basically impossible to have both being balanced. Free-for-all fights (and team fights to a lesser extent) should only be focused on to the extent that he ensures moves aren't completely broken (as in, on the level of Ike's forward-smash if it were faster) because the people who play those matches are also far more likely to have items on or play on stages regardless of hazards or layout.

At the end of the day, the people who are really going to care about balance are the ones that have one-on-one fights; it isn't all that fun if the majority of characters in a game aren't viable.

I really hope that Smash 4 can have balance patches, and I also hope that Sakurai examines the metagame's developments as they happen rather than looking at standard free-for-all online matches to determine what needs balancing.

“The game balance of Super Smash Bros. Brawl started six years before its release, and it most likely goes back even further during its time of development, and it’s never been reformed even through the updates afterwards,” says Sakurai.

I think balancing Smash would be a nightmare. Fighters like SF are challenging enough to balance, and you fight inside rectangle basically.

I think updates and actually working with the competitive community (like other fighting developers do) would help smash a lot. You can't ask for better play testers than the competitive community, and they do it for free.

Click to expand...

Fighters like SF, Blazblue, etc. are infinitely more difficult to balance. Smash is actually a rather simple game for the most part.

Director Masahiro Sakurai has always placed a great deal of importance on balancing games in the Super Smash Bros. series, and he won’t be making any exceptions for the upcoming Wii U and 3DS game. In this week’s issue of Famitsu, Sakurai talks about the importance of balance in his feature column.

“Now that Sunday’s day off is past, I’m currently working on the character adjustment for Super Smash Bros. for Nintendo 3DS and Wii U,” says Sakurai. “At the moment, Bowser is very strong. He’s really strong. Fans of Smash Bros. probably never saw him as too much of a strong character, but this time, his ability to knock others out is very strong!”

Interesting that Bowser will be a much more powerful character compared to how he was in previous games, which is awesome because let's be honest, Bowser while pretty fun to play, didn't stand a chance against a majority of the cast.

Click to expand...

I don't care. My new mains are powerful enough (Villager and Rosalina), I'm not in the competitive scene, so I guess I shouldn't have come to this thread in the first place...?

I think balancing Smash would be a nightmare. Fighters like SF are challenging enough to balance, and you fight inside rectangle basically.

I think updates and actually working with the competitive community (like other fighting developers do) would help smash a lot. You can't ask for better play testers than the competitive community, and they do it for free.

Click to expand...

Fighters like SF, Blazblue, etc. are infinitely more difficult to balance. Smash is actually a rather simple game for the most part.

Click to expand...

A game having simpler mechanics doesn't mean it is easier to balance. Considering other fighters don't have to worry about how the stage will affect gameplay, there is more potential in Smash for designers to miss a balance issue during play testing.

I think balancing Smash would be a nightmare. Fighters like SF are challenging enough to balance, and you fight inside rectangle basically.

I think updates and actually working with the competitive community (like other fighting developers do) would help smash a lot. You can't ask for better play testers than the competitive community, and they do it for free.

Click to expand...

Fighters like SF, Blazblue, etc. are infinitely more difficult to balance. Smash is actually a rather simple game for the most part.

Click to expand...

A game having simpler mechanics doesn't mean it is easier to balance. Considering other fighters don't have to worry about how the stage will affect gameplay, there is more potential in Smash for designers to miss a balance issue during play testing.

Click to expand...

Are you really going to sit here and say that Smash is more difficult to balance than something like Blazblue because Smash has tiered stages?

Fighters like SF, Blazblue, etc. are infinitely more difficult to balance. Smash is actually a rather simple game for the most part.

Click to expand...

A game having simpler mechanics doesn't mean it is easier to balance. Considering other fighters don't have to worry about how the stage will affect gameplay, there is more potential in Smash for designers to miss a balance issue during play testing.

Click to expand...

Are you really going to sit here and say that Smash is more difficult to balance than something like Blazblue because Smash has tiered stages?

Click to expand...

Are you going to put forth an argument why? You have the rhetoric of a 4 year old.

Fighters like SF, Blazblue, etc. are infinitely more difficult to balance. Smash is actually a rather simple game for the most part.

Click to expand...

A game having simpler mechanics doesn't mean it is easier to balance. Considering other fighters don't have to worry about how the stage will affect gameplay, there is more potential in Smash for designers to miss a balance issue during play testing.

Click to expand...

Are you really going to sit here and say that Smash is more difficult to balance than something like Blazblue because Smash has tiered stages?

Click to expand...

It isn't just platforms, though you're definitely underestimating the impact stage layout has on balance in a game like Smash Bros.; depending on the stage, matchups can become completely polarized based on the stage alone. Try taking Dedede to any stage with a wall or a walk-off ledge and see what I mean.

Smash also has other things that some other fighters don't have that make balance pretty damn difficult:
- Analog movement
- Free-for-all, 1-on-1 and team battles, all of which require character/stage balancing
- Shields/shieldbreaking abilities of attacks
- Directional Influence
- Rolls/airdodging/teching
- Grabs (and more importantly, chaingrabs)
- Every single element of a stage, including platform layout (vertical AND horizontal placement), placement of the boundaries and ledges, etc.
- The percentage system and knockback growth - this one is HUGE since when you combine it with character weight and fallspeed it determines when characters can get comboed or KO'd

And this is all in addition to things that regular fighters have like spacing, projectiles, hitboxes, the neutral game and individual character matchups.

Not to say that Smash is harder to balance than regular fighters since they have elements Smash Bros. doesn't have. That said, having done balancing for Super Smash Flash 2 in the past it's certainly not "basic".

Fighters like SF, Blazblue, etc. are infinitely more difficult to balance. Smash is actually a rather simple game for the most part.

Click to expand...

A game having simpler mechanics doesn't mean it is easier to balance. Considering other fighters don't have to worry about how the stage will affect gameplay, there is more potential in Smash for designers to miss a balance issue during play testing.

Click to expand...

Are you really going to sit here and say that Smash is more difficult to balance than something like Blazblue because Smash has tiered stages?

Click to expand...

That video says hi

as does ddd's wall infinite chaingrab.

the fact that smash has stages that are more than a simple background and music change, makes it quite a different beast to balance.

If that's how you view my advice then damn, there's no helping you.
And lol, "facts". Almost everything you stated is just speculation like the rest of us, Namco Bandai probably putting Goku in because of their ties with the character? Speculation, not fact. You know what is fact? That Sakurai stated that anime/manga characters are not welcome in Smash. Oh, you're saying that he may change his mind due to whatever reason? Speculation.

Click to expand...

Are you seriously trying the grammar hammer? Speculation is a very loaded word. Sometimes it can mean fact, most of the time not. Let's analyze this more closely.

To say "Sakurai will change his mind about manga characters" is a speculative statement. It is a conclusion arrived to by analysis of varying factors of varying reliability and factual context. It is also fucking wrong. It is stated in a definitive matter, thus making it misleading and definitively incorrect.

Now, to say "there is a chance Sakurai may change his mind about manga characters" is a statement of fact until it is proven otherwise. Until something happens, there is always a chance. Providing further evidence only strengthens that chance.

Saying that "Goku has a chance at being in SSB" is not speculation. It is fact. Homer Simpson has a chance at being in SSB. A small bundle of twigs has a chance at being SSB. The world has a chance at ending tomorrow. Until the events come to pass, then there is always a chance for anything to happen, by the sheer definition of what chance is. This is not speculation, it is just the nature of reality. Unless you want to start denying reality (in which case anything like facts and reasoning become entirely meaningless and everything goes out the window and we have nothing to argue about), then to say that there is "no chance" of something happening is a pure fallacy, until proven otherwise (though even then it's quesitonable... though I won't get into quantum mechanics and time travel or whatever).

Nothing "delusional" about it since I'm pretty sure no one views it as fact, get off your high horse, all you're basically doing is discouraging speculation. Because if we go, "oh yay everything can change" then there'd be blanket statements galore(spongebob for smash). And actually these rules DO have an impact or else people wouldn't use it to predict Rosalina, Megaman or some of the Brawl characters. It's been proven that what Sakurai says in interviews mostly DOES translate into the game, or else people would stop guessing, and predicting. There's nothing delusional about accepting those precedents when they're met with good results.

Click to expand...

Of course not. Doesn't change the fact that it's still all willing delusion.

I'm not trying to discourage speculation, I'm trying to balance the tipping scale between fact and excessive speculation.

There's a line I'm trying to get you all to see here, basically. Obviously throwing everything out the window because nothing is definitive factually until proven would be boring and no one would post here, but the other side of the spectrum is just a bad, at least IMO. Completely ignoring that fact and taking every little bit of information from four years ago as absolute law is pushing the other end of the envelope just was well.

That's why I feel there needs to be line drawn somewhere. A balance between the comparison of reality and speculation (a line which some would refer to as COMMON SENSE) where you have to weigh your options on both ends of the spectrum and accept factors from every contributing factor, like any scientist, physician, or analyst would.

It's perfectly possible that Sakurai will stick to his old rules.

It's perfectly possible that other companies or people will pressure him (or just ask him nicely) to forgo those rules for a particular exception and he may bend/break a rule or two.

Both events have happened in the past, and accepting the existence of one possibility does not automatically deny the other, like you all seem so content on believing.

I think Goku is a perfect place to draw that line. The thought of it years ago was complete hogwash, but to outright deny it's possibility, or the increase in possibility due to the new circumstances, is pushing on the delusion aspect. I'm not saying you should all believe that Spongebob will be playable, I'm saying you should analyze the situation beyond the "rules" and weigh every possibility in a balanced and logical manner. Is that so much to ask?

It's not even about Goku. This is a fucking life lesson. Don't get so caught up on the few meager factors you've personally defined as the most important and look at the bigger picture. Don't block yourself in behind only a few walls when there's a whole world of possibilities. Think outside the box. Yeesh.

It will never be balanced anyway. There's simply too many different factors and options to take into consideration. Stages, different modes and settings, items, especially final smash attacks, all play a tremendous role in the over all balance.

Players in the competitive scene of course have their own idea about how the game is supposed to be played: no items, no overly crazy stages, certainly no coin matches etc. Even if Nintendo decides to cater more to those players, it's not like they are going to turn their back to the vast majority of players that doesn't go to tournament. They have to make a game that's at least playable inn all the different game modes and with all the different settings.

While I don't particuarly agree with any of TB's choices (except Shulk but he knows this already ), I like the idea and will share my own.
Lyn
Roy
Mewtwo
Ridley
Takamaru
Third Party would be Amaterasu (if @AmaterasuDXandY doesn't agree there's something wrong here)